Royals Review: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Around SBN: Baby Boilers no more: Michigan State-Purdue Preview

Spreadsheet Baseball: An Article That Assumes We're Not Using A 3-Man Rotation

"With me, Greinke and Banny, I think that's three pretty good guys going up against anybody," - Royals' All-Star Starting Pitcher Gil Meche.

"Brett Tomko is No. 4 for me. I told Brett before we ever signed him, before he chose us over Cincinnati, 'You need to know, in a perfect scenario, what I want as a manager and what we are looking for as an organization. And that's for you to be a part of our rotation.'" - New Fearless Leader Trey Hillman.

"You go to Jorge De La Rosa," Hillman said. "We'd love to have a lefty in our mix and I'm not going to try to hide the excitement of having either him or a John Bale moving out of the bullpen." - Hillman again, kind of scaring yours truly.

As a blogger, one of the things you often here is that we're too negative as a species. After all, it's so much easier to critique the people who actually get paid for their jobs--sportswriters, players, managers--than it is to actually do work on par with one of these people. Think Tony Pena's a bum, do you? Get out there and hit that spheroid yourself. Think Hillman's already a bad manager? You don't have the first clue how to manage a clubhouse. Think you're a better writer than Woody Paige or Jay Mariotti? You are. Sorry, the sportswriter thing is a bad example.

So I don't want anyone getting the wrong idea about the quotes above. I recognize that I've takne all three from an mlb.com article that ran at the end of last month and that Hillman's mind could have changed. I'm not judging--or condemning--Hillman based on the idea that he'd like Brett Tomko and and Jorge de la Rosa to do well. I'm simply looking to try and sort out the competition for the fourth and fifth rotation spots for the Royals. I've no doubt Hillman knows more about these players than I do, of course. But don't mistake thinking critically for thinking negatively. With any luck, our hero Gilgameche is correct in his quote. If that's so, then we can look forward to a nice 1-2-3 punch in the rotation in 2008. What's clear is that those three are virtually entrenched unless there's some kind of injury or other shocking development in ST (please no).

With Meche, Bannister, and Greinke penned in, that leaves the fourth and fifth sports. Today we'll look at the hopefuls for those spots. While it's true that hardly any team has good enough depth to boost a truly "good" fourth starter and that the fifth starter can be skipped quite frequently, who these innings go to and how they do with them will still have an impact on the Royals this year.

Hillman's Hero: Brett Tomko

2007 Stats of Note:

131.1 IP, 40-19 G-GS, 88 ERA+, 5.55 ERA, 10.24 H/9, 7.20 K/9, 3.29 BB/9, 1.24 HR/9

Okay look, I'm not seriously suggesting that Hillman has a mancrush on Brett Tomko, but I'd feel a lot better if Hillman had said something to the effect or "Tomko will compete for a rotation spot" instead of that line about being the fourth starter. The problem is that Tomko might actually be one of the best options available...Hillman might be depressingly right about Brett's spot on the Royals' pitching depth chart.

The above stat line, coming from the soon-to-be 35-year-old Tomko, looks like that of a pitcher who is losing his ability to work within the zone and not pay for it. That K-Rate is actually pretty nice, but it may have received a PETCO-induced boost towards the end of the year. Really, if Tomko is in the Royals' rotation...there are worse things, but here's hoping someone forces him and his $3 million dollars to the bullpen. There was, I'll argue, nothing really wrong with his signing, as the Royals allgedly have more cash to burn and it's only a one-year deal. Committing to him in the rotation should only happening if the younger possibilities aren't ready or just make no sense. You remember how Gil Meche brought his HR rate down moving to the K? Don't count on that happening with Mr. Tomko. This could be the end of an...er...undeniably persistent career from ol' Brett, during which his ERA+ has been above average  only twice in eleven years, but then again pitching out of the 'pen might extend his career a couple more years.

Token Lefty Possibility: Jorge de la Rosa

2007 Stats of Note:

130.0 IP, 26-23 G-GS, 81 ERA+, 5.82 ERA, 11.08 H/9, 5.68 K/9, 3.67 BB/9, 1.38 HR/9

Ouch. I just basically took Brett Tomko apart, and even single rate listed here for de la Rosa is markedly worse than Tomko's own numbers in pretty much the exact same amount of pitching. To be fair, de la Rosa hadn't carried this type of workload since he made it to the majors, but the line between "giving him starts to see what he's got" and "know when to cut bait" was passed last year when Kansas City kept a struggling de la Rosa in the rotation while Zack Greinke lit it up in the bullpen. de la Rosa displayed better control than he has in the past, and could make a passable lefty reliever. We can only hope that Hillman and Co. figure out that having a passable starter in the rotation is miles better than having a crappy lefty penciled in just because he's left-handed and "gives the other team a different look."

Really, the problem for de la Rosa can be summed up with the platoon split for 2007:

Lefties Vs. JDLR: .234/.305/.299
Righties Vs. JDLR: .321/.384/.557

That is a darn strong argument that this guy should be arm-wrestling Jimmy Gobble for the LOOGY job rather than competing for a starting job.

Last Year's Deadline Prize: Kyle Davies

2007 Stats of Note:

136.0 IP, 28-28 G-GS, 73 ERA+, 6.09 ERA, 10.26 H/9, 6.55 K/9, 4.63 BB/9, 1.46 HR/9

While Davies is regarded to have more upside as a starter than either de la Rosa or Tomko (of course), very few pitchers in baseball did less to earn 20+ starts than Davies did. After coming over from the Braves for a damaged Octavio Dotel, Davies' ERA was an abysmal 71 and he continued to hand out walks like they were going out of style. Even more troubling, he wasn't even "effectively wild," as he gave up a home run every five innings in a Royal uniform. It's tough to see Davies succeeding without a major overhaul of the way he was pitching last year. Even at just 23, his stock has fallen quite a bit since he broke into the league at age 21. Whether it's injuries, bad mechanics, or--likely--a combination of both, this is a kid who needs some serious help from the Royals coaching staff and some serious work ethic if he's going to turn things around. His 2007 line just isn't major league quality, and certainly is befitting of a guy with "three good pitches."

As I said at the time of the trade, it was near impossible to lose when all we gave up was Mr. 23-innings-as-a-Royal Dotel, but it's not clear if there's even going to be a winner here at all. I'd be appreciative if you all could let me know how Davies looks if you get a chance to catch him on TV. Right now, he profiles as AAA to start the year.

Golden Boy: Luke Hochevar

2007 Stats of Note.

While it might not be fair to Luke to compare him to Miller or Lincecum, it's pretty darn fair to ask if he's going to make it as a major league pitcher. I'm noy privy to Hochevar's attitude or work habits, so I'm not going to be the one who's going to stand up and tell you he's too lazy or whatever to become a major league starter. I am going to be the one who tells you that unless he finds a way to bring down his hits and home runs allowed, he's going to do nothing but throw-and-duck on a major league mound. Oddly enough, his K-rates and BB-rates actually look pretty darn good. This suggests to me that Hochevar had been pretty good at blowing pitches by minor league hitters, but needs to get better at locating within the zone and making less "hit this, chump!" pitches. It remains to be seen if he's capable of that, but he should get a long look in ST to give the Royals an idea of how close he is. Keep in mind, the dude turns 24 this year. He's pretty close to make or break. I don't root against Hochevar. Far from it, in fact, but he needs to get his butt in gear or he won't make anyone forget Steve Andrade. Yeah, that's right: I went there. Time to trade that 9+ K-rate for a couple less base knocks, Luke.

Not to be a broken record about this, but Bob McClure has his work cut out for him with all these projects. And we're not even counting Greinke as project-ish in this article, which he kind of still is until he's proven otherwise.

Token Lefty Possibility #2: John Bale

2007 Stats of Note:

40.0 IP, 26-0 G-GS, 116 ERA+, 4.05 ERA, 10.12 H/9, 9.45 K/9, 3.83 BB/9, 0.23 HR/9

We can't really laugh at this possibility, because there's a pretty good chance that Bale would be as good as JDLR would be in the rotation. If we have to have a lefty, I suppose it wouldn't hurt to give someone other than Mr. 5.82-ERA a shot. The thing is, Bale's track record suggests that he's always handled lefties well and struggled against righties. He actually did pretty well against both last year, but it was 40 innings so we really don't have much to go on. Suffice to say that if he doesn't make the rotation he can K a lot of batters coming out of the 'pen as one of the southpaws. If he does make the rotation...temper your expectations, since he's 33-year-old reliever who's always had a platoon split. Still, on a team where Brett Tomko looks like a fine back-of-the-rotation option, you could do worse than to root for Bale to dark horse his way into the five-man.

Beloved, But Absolutely Not To Be Counted On: Brandon Duckworth, Luke Hudson

Both don't really have 2007 stats that I feel comfortably saying reflect any "true ability." Neither one has shown any skill at staying healthy, and while I like them both...I'm not going crazy here. Both are longer shots than Kyle Davies, in my estimation.

The Sleeper: Joakim Soria

2007 Stats of Note:

69.0 IP, 62-0 G-GS, 189 ERA+, 2.48 ERA, 6.0 H/9, 9.78 K/9, 2.48 BB/9, 0.39 HR/9

There's pretty much nothing in that line that suggests to me that Soria couldn't be a successful major league starting pitcher if he can be eased into the role without the injury nexus claiming him. He did very, very well as closer last year, showing the ability to pitch multiple innings and close out strong line-ups. He's a smart pitcher too, as it's not as if he's just pumping 98-MPH fastballs by everyone. Soria has more than one good pitch, locates well, and seemed to thrive on the challenge of pitching in the majors as a Rule 5 pick.

The question is what the Royals want to do with him in the future. Given the other options listed, you can count me on the bandwagon of people who'd like to see what he could do with 100+ innings. It'd be an interesting out of the box idea if the Royals had Soria closing some games and starting others as the de facto fifth starter (who can be skipped a lot) to keep his workload down and get him starts at the same time. I don't think that's what will happen--I think he's 'pen bound this year--but I really think the Royals need to entertain this possibility sometime. One out of every twenty times, it proves the better idea to leave a younger, talented starter prospect in the bullpen. The other nineteen it's a waste of value.

All together, thosee are my thoughts on the competition for the fourth and fifth starter spots. It is very important to remember, when reading this article, that all teams have trouble filling out the back of the rotation, as the competition for the 4-5 spots might seem a little depressing otherwise. In terms of the Royals specifically, I'm not going to be so bold as to be make a prediction, because ST is going to play a big role here. While I'm on board with the idea that ST stats mean hardly anything at all, I'm so naive as to dismiss ST entirely. After all, if the organization didn't use some of their observations of ST play to fill out the roster, what exactly would they have to go on? No, sorry, like it or not, spring training play a role in forging the opening day roster and that's not going to change. Take the stats with a grain of salt, yes. But look for who's gained velocity and who's lost it, who's got a tight shoulder and who's lost weight, and who suddenly developed a split finger fastball. This may be a somewhat frustrating time of year for sabermetricians, but it's a fun time of year for all baseball fans.

Spreadsheet Baseball returns next week, hopefully rounding up some ST info. In the mean time, questions/comments on this effort are welcome/encouraged. Happy reading, and Don't Panic.

 

0 recs  |  Comment 62 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

2007 stats
Why is it that when evaluating a player, most people just look a the prior season's stats?  Are 2004, 2005 and 2006 irrelevant?  2007 is a data point, but it is not the only one.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 3:26 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I didn't want to turn this into a megapost,
so I didn't include three year trends. That's for another article I've got planned for after I receieve the book.
Obama-Buck 2008!

by NHZ on Feb 28, 2008 8:18 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Ok, but
One can't seriously evaluate Tomko (or any pitcher) without looking at multiple years of stats.  When you look just at Tomko's stats, he looks like an obviously awful pitcher.  But in the context of his past 4 years, not so much.  His age and the trendline is, of course, relevant.  When/if you analyze his state in another diary, be sure to take note of the nice K/9 improvement he made last year.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 8:55 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Hypebole alert
"[Tomko] needs to get his butt in gear or he won't make anyone forget Steve Andrade."

A litle nutty, don't you think?  You're basically saying that he's not far from being a complete failure as a pitcher.

"Time to trade that 9+ K-rate for a couple less base knocks, Luke."

So if you are valuing a pitcher's ability to avoid giving up hits over peripherals like K/9 and K/BB, then can I assume you think that Bannister is going to continue to be a great major league pitcher with essentially no regression?  [I don't recall your feelings on Bannister, so this is an honest question]  For a pitcher with Hochevar's stuff, I think his K/9 and K/BB are a lot more telling than the frequency with which he gave up hits.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 3:32 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Make that hyperbole
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 3:33 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Slight hyberbole, yes.
But the guy was awful last year. If he gets shunted to righty middle relief...he could become irrevelant fast with guys like Nunez possibly taking those roles.

In regard to Bannister, I'm a little worried about how he's going to start out after last year's workload. Long term, I think he'll be a lot like Brad Radke.

Obama-Buck 2008!

by NHZ on Feb 28, 2008 8:21 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Awful?
Hochevar was awful last year?  This is based solely on his ERA, right?  You can't evaluate any pitcher solely by their ERA.  This is doubly true of minor leaguers.  This is triply true of minor leaguers who play in hitter's leagues.

This guy is still a top 100 prospect (top 50 according to some) in baseball who everyone still realizes has plus stuff and plus control.  And yet you think he may be sliding to irrelevance?  Hochevar is one of the best young pitchers in this organization.  He faced AA and AAA hitters for the first time last year and had some difficulty adapting to levels of competition which he'd never faced before.  It was even harder to adapt without his best secondary pitch.

Slight hyperbole to compare him to Andrade?  That was way over the top and unsupportable hyperbole.  Essentially giving up on a very good prospect after one so-so minor league season is pretty silly.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 8:27 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Fudge
I'm sorry, for some reason I got my wires crossed and thought you were talking about Tomko. It's been a long week.

Anyways, yes, Andrade is hyperbole for certain. And it was supposed to be, mainly because Hochevar's done so little so far profesionally. Please excuse the brainfart.

It wasn't meant to be dismissive of him, merely to highlight that Hochevar is old for a guy who's only played one full minor league season and hasn't had much success. I'm still pretty high on him, actually.

God, I have NO idea how I mixed up Tomko and Hochevar. Ugh. Working on Four hours sleep much be catching up to me.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 28, 2008 8:45 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Wait, now I know
you wrote:

"[Tomko]." Thank god, maybe I'm not going insane. Eevn if I cna't sepll.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 28, 2008 8:48 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, my mistake there
But I think Meche is going to make people forget Andrade...and eventually Nunez.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 8:51 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

A safe bet.
I brought up a schlub like Andrade for the hyperbole for a reason: he's a guy who always K'ed large numbers of AAA batters...and never found his feet in the show. A big stretch, of course, because that's what hyperbole is. A bad hyperbole? Methinks not.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 28, 2008 10:52 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Andrade
I don't know if it was good hypberbole, but it is a horrible analogy or comp.  Andrade wasn't a top 10 draftee, nor did he have stuff and control which big league scouts fawned over at the level that scouts love Hochevar.

And did you notice that after typing Tomko when I meant Hochevar, I typed Meche when I meant Hochevar?  Maybe I'm having an aneurysm.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 10:57 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

ARGH!
It wasn't meant as a comp! It was meant to be a very-worst-case-scenario of what Hochevar, a prospect I actually like a lot, could turn out to be. "Hypberbole" is, by definition, an exaggeration. But I get it. You think I'd've been better served using someone else. It really wasn't meant to be taken seriously. If I was to give you a more realistic "bad Hooch" scenario, I'd say Daniel Cabrera v. 2007 might be a good one. Mediocre control, too many homers. That better?

Yes, I saw Meche. I thought it was a joke, actually. You should've just said "aha! funny me!" :P

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 28, 2008 11:01 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I like that more reasonable comp better
But actually my crystal ball says that he'll turn into a pitcher with a pretty good K/9, pretty good K/BB, pretty good WHIP, pretty good HR/9.  I don't think he'll be great or maybe even very good at anything, just pretty good overall.  Basically a pretty good #3 starter, or maybe a #2.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 11:13 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Adjusting to a new level of competition
When Hochevar made the jump to AAA, he initially struggled.  He made 10 starts.  His first 5 were pretty good.  His last 5 were good: 3.41 ERA, 7.1 K/9, 3.6 K/BB.

You have to expect a prospect to take a little time to adjust to a new level of competition, particularly without one of his best pitches.  This guy is still a really good prospect.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 8:48 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I know
I recognize that Andrade is hyperbole. See above and you'll see why I got confused.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 28, 2008 8:50 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Spring training vs. spring training stats
While I'm on board with the idea that ST stats mean hardly anything at all, I'm so naive as to dismiss ST entirely. After all, if the organization didn't use some of their observations of ST play to fill out the roster, what exactly would they have to go on? No, sorry, like it or not, spring training play a role in forging the opening day roster and that's not going to change.

Official spring training stats are meaningless.  Spring training and the performances therein are not meaningless.  The organization can, should and will make its personnel decisions based on performance in prior years and performance in spring training.  But "performance in spring training" does not mean "A Game stats."  It means everything that they've seen from the player from the first workout to the last including all of his skills and tools.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 3:40 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I think...
...some people may have been confused/misled by the title of your article.  Not that you should have re-titled it, but maybe Spring Training A-Game stats are meaningless.  Of course, I wrote a slightly misleading title in "Dayton Moore Has No Idea How To Build An Offense", so...

by Royals Nation on Feb 28, 2008 3:45 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Also, I'm sure...
..the organization keeps tabs of strikeouts, home runs, etc. etc. in practices or intrasquad games.  Also, things like MPH, timed runs, etc. can count as "stats".

by Royals Nation on Feb 28, 2008 3:46 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Spring training stats
The only stats that we, as fans, have is official A Game stats.  But in reality, while players will also play in some B Games and minor league games, the sample size is still too small to be significant and meaningful.  And of course, there are all of the other problems inherent in spring training stats.

And I really doubt anyone keeps track of "stats" from practices and intrasquad games, nor should they.  Personnel decisions are made by the totality of observations that the organization makes about players througout spring training.  And the stats, the few that there are, are a small part of that.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 3:52 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Terrific wrap up
I guess if it were up to me, I'd put Bale as the #4 starter and try Davies as the #5. I think de la Rosa might be better suited as a reliever, maybe even as a LOOGY (although with Gobble already here, and Mahay, who isn't quite a LOOGY, but is left handed, that may be redundant). I think Tomko could be more valuable as a reliever than as a starter. He has long been touted as a guy with great "stuff", but that hasn't translated into great numbers. Guys like that seem to typically fare better in the pen.

I'm not wild about Davies being in the rotation, but its about time to see what he can do as a starter. Maybe you break camp with DLR in the rotation and Davies in Omaha. But by June, if DLR hasn't figured it out, I think its time to cut bait, or at least demote him to the pen to see what Davies can do.

It'll be really interesting to see what our rotation looks like in August. By then we could see Davies, Hochevar, Soria, maybe even Carlos Rosa making starts for this team. Exciting to think about.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 28, 2008 3:51 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

i like that
I really like the idea of seeing Bale in the rotation for some reason. His BABIP was ridiculous last year and should come down. He has a good fastball WITH deception and can locate it. The downside here is that he is 34 (or so) and won't be around much longer (unless we extend him!).

Meche, Banny, Zack, Bale, Davies

CL Soria
SU Yabuta
SU Mahay
MR Gobble
MR Peralta
MR Hochevar (possible 6th starter)
LR Tomko (possible 6th starter)

That leaves Nunez...damn Tomko was a pointless signing (IMO). I hear McClure was in on that signing, so maybe (just maybe!) he can help him out.

by doublestix on Feb 28, 2008 5:15 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yea
I can't see any way Hooch makes the team forcing Nunez to waivers. Nunez will make this team. Either Hooch or Davies or both will be in Omaha.

Also I bet Tomko and DLR are the #4 and #5 starters.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 28, 2008 10:27 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

god hillman scares me
be afraid
be very afraid
I wanna know what love is, I want you to show me

by LeoBloom on Feb 28, 2008 3:52 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Oh brother
Hillman's the best thing to happen to the KC Royals since Hal MacRae
Trust Trey.

by timlacy on Feb 29, 2008 6:01 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Hell, I'm not depressed
For the first time in forever we have a decent-looking top 3. It seems like in years past, Maroth would have been signed to fill the #4 spot. Instead, he's not even one of the choices you list.

by raefzilla on Feb 28, 2008 4:19 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

#4 starter?
Heck, Mike Maroth in the past would have been given a 2 year $9 million deal and made our opening day starter

Maroth's ERA+ the last three years:

90, 109, 65

Elarton's ERA+ the three years before Allard handed him a two year $9 million deal and made him the Opening Day starter:

79, 76, 91

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 28, 2008 4:31 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

You're right...
I remember hearing that Joe Mays had the inside track to be the #2 starter early in 06 spring training and thinking "this is gonna be a long year."

by raefzilla on Feb 28, 2008 4:57 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

UGLINESS!!!
That's disgusting.

by KC Chris on Feb 28, 2008 5:46 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Bale and Hochevar
Nice write up.  

On Bale's platoon splits, saying he is someone who has always "struggled against righties" and "always had a platoon split" is not accurate.  Based on available data, the only time he struggled against righties was the 46.3 major league innings he pitched in 2003, which were so long ago that they have zero predictive value.  Even then, in his prior major league action in 2001 (26 IP), he actually was pretty good against righties.  Splits are not available from his recent NPL seasons, so all we really have to consider is last year.  It would be fair to say that his success against righties is inconclusive, but not that he has always had a platoon split.      

Hochevar's minor league K and BB rates translate roughly to 6.3 K9/3.3 BB9 (AA), which is merely okay, and 5.2 K9/3.6 BB9 (AAA), which is Jorge de la Rosa territory.

by Gopherballs on Feb 28, 2008 4:27 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I will say it again
As I have said it for ten months now.

Hochevar was not allowed to use his primary out pitch in AA/AAA last year.  

this was done to improve his fastball command.

He posted those stats with guys basically knowing what was coming.

Fully unleashed, he is going to be a stud.

Not ML-calliber, not ML-average, a stud.

Book it...a stud...

by howserfan on Feb 28, 2008 5:16 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Hopefully
Hopefully 9x3, as in innings and outs.  That's a pretty big stud though.

by KC Chris on Feb 28, 2008 5:48 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Is facing the Tigers, Indians, Yankees, Red Sox
really the best place for Hochevar to shake the rust off the pitches he has allegedly not thrown for two years (remember, he missed a year with his holdout) and to learn how to mix all of his pitches?

by Gopherballs on Feb 28, 2008 7:08 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Rust
I think he should probably start the year in Omaha, but the Royals coaches and front office are the ones who will know if those pitches look "rusty" or if they look major league ready.

And since Piccollo, his coaches and Hochevar himself have all said that he wasn't allowed to throw his best secondary pitch, I think we can take the "allegedly" off of your above sentence.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 28, 2008 7:19 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I am aware he was
limited, but how much improved will that make? He had a 5+ ERA in AAA and over 4.60 in AA ball. He should improve, but I'm not taking it for granted.
Obama-Buck 2008!

by NHZ on Feb 28, 2008 8:17 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

ERA bad, peripherals good
I know peripherals aren't everything, but Hooch's K-BB numbers were really good. Not great, but really good.

I do think he needs to put together a few months of real success in AAA before we send him out against Miguel Cabrera and Grady Sizemore.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 28, 2008 10:26 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Your point is taken
I got a little lazy there. But still, his periphs were NOT really good. He walked too many and gave up too many dingers.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 28, 2008 10:50 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm with you as long as...
...they start him in the bullpen---just like the Twins did with Santana. - TL
Trust Trey.

by timlacy on Feb 29, 2008 6:02 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

He's the great unknown
I just don't know how there could possibly be any room for him in the 12-man pitching staff.  The following are all locks:

Meche
Bannister
Greinke
Tomko
Soria
Yabuta
Mahay
Gobble
Bale
Peralta

That's 10 pitchers.  The next tier includes:

Nunez
De La Rosa
Hochevar
Musser
Braun
Davies

Hudson is in the third tier with guys like Duckworth and Matt Wright.

De La Rosa or Nunez might be traded because they are out of options.  But there would still have to be multiple injuries for Hudson to squeak his way onto the 25-man roster.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 29, 2008 12:17 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

if we lose Nunez, i will be upset
It's never a good thing to trade from a position of desparation.

For this reason, I think the return on any package involving DLR or Nunez will be pretty low.  

If it becomes apparent that there's only room for one of them on the roster, I think the best option may be to try to sneak DLR through waivers.

This space intentionally left blank.

by marbotty on Feb 29, 2008 12:55 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'd much rather have Nunez than DLR
Frankly, I think both of them have a future as MLB relievers, but I think Nunez will be better.  I am a little concerned about his mechanics and frame.  I wouldn't be surprised if he tore a rotator cuff or needed Tommy John surgery in the next few years.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 29, 2008 1:03 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

You know I like him, RR,
but he's got a lot of ground to make just to make the team.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 29, 2008 11:01 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I know they are longshots
but no Maroth, Nomo, or Lawrence? Are we all forgetting that Maroth was a decent back of the rotation starter until last season? I could see him taking the 4th spot in the rotation if he reverts to his old form for the most part. We could do a lot worse than Lawrence at #5 too (see Kyle Davies). None of these guys are locks (in fact, far from it), but they are guys who have had success before and could contribute if healthy. A guy like Tomko is probably best suited for the bullpen at this stage of his career. I think you're right about Hochever in one respect. The dude is 24,pitched in college and even sat out one year. He should be just about MLB ready. I hope he gives us a reason to be optimistic about him this year. And the last mystery is Tyler Lumsden. Is he horrible or did he just have a lousy 2007? He could pitch his way into the rotation towards the end of the year if he can step up and harness his talent.

by royaldaddy on Feb 29, 2008 1:39 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Maroth, Nomo and Lawrence
Maybe Maroth could put it together and turn things around.  He was an average pitcher as recently as 2006.  However, the story is very different for Lawrence and Nomo.  Lawrence hasn't been close to average since 2004.  For Nomo, it has been since 2003.  It would be miraculous for those washed up pitchers to suddenly be able to pitch again.

By the way, Tomko has a much better recent history than all of the above.  There's a reason he's penciled into the rotation already.  He's better than all of the rest of the contenders for the 4 and 5 spots.

With Tomko, we already have one aged vet filling a hole who won't be part of the team's future.  I don't mind that.  But I'd really hate to have two in the 12-man pitching staff.  Given the nature of this season for the Royals, I'd really like to use one or two spots on the pitching staff to develop and audition young pitchers.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 29, 2008 2:15 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm with you on Tomko
But Maroth has not been league average since 2004.  Maroth pitched lousy in 2006 (4.0 K/9, 2.7 BB/9, 1.8 HR/9, 42% GB%, 83.8% LOB%, 5.92 FIP).  His defense and home park were incredibly good.  Unfortunately, 2008 Maroth does not come with the 2006 Tigers defense or spacious Comerica Park.

by Gopherballs on Feb 29, 2008 12:43 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Maroth
was average for all of thirteen games in 2006. In the previous year, 2005, he was below average when he started the whole year. I'd argue that if he'd played all of 2006, he'd be trending steadily downward. Ironically, his injuries in 2006 seem to give up hope he'll turn around more than anything else.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 29, 2008 2:24 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Maroth, Nomo, and Lawrence
all seemed cooked to me. Nomo was last seen throwing 83 MPH fastballs with the D-Rays. Lawrence was fading before his terrible injury occured. Maroth has aged prematurely due to a lack of stuff.

Lumsden? Hopefully he'll do well enough to get the call. I didn't see him as a candidate for the rotation with the way he pitched last year.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 29, 2008 11:03 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Nomo is here for one reason...
...and one reason alone: translate for our new bullpen guy from Japan. Period. - TL
Trust Trey.

by timlacy on Feb 29, 2008 6:04 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

More of a companion than a translator
They have hired a personal translator for Yabuta.  I think Nomo is there to be a companion for Yabuta and ease his transition by pairing him with someone he can talk to and someone who had made the same transition successfully.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 29, 2008 6:08 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

On Tomko's K rate
How does a K-rate get a "Petco-induced boost"?  I am aware that it is an extreme pitcher's park, but I wasn't aware that being a pitcher's park meant it amounted in more strikeouts.  Maybe the backdrop the pitcher is working in front of can have some effect on picking up the ball out of the pitcher's hand, but I would think Ks are pretty park neutral, as mound heights and the distance between the mound and home are the same everywhere.  Am I wrong?

by CentralChamps2009 on Feb 29, 2008 10:58 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

I did say it "might have"
and there are parks that are known to suppress or be more conducive to strikeouts. Coors and Safeco, for example, so I was saying that it's possible that the best pitcher's park in the game helped a bit with the K-rate.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 29, 2008 11:05 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Parks are not K neutral
Per firstinning.com, Petco lead the NL in boosting strikeouts last year with a +0.026 change in K rate per plate appearance, which was even more than Safeco (+0.020).

by Gopherballs on Feb 29, 2008 12:32 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Good catch
That's pretty much exactly what I would've guessed...PETCO forces batters to take approaches they're not used to.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 29, 2008 2:22 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Maroth/bigger question
I'm surprised Maroth wasn't mentioned in that post as at least a possibility, especially in the context of the supposed southpaw necessity.  That has to give him some leg up over the other proven retreads like Tomko and Lawrence.  

NYRoyals brings up a very good question about the bigger picture.  We all know any aging veteran who rounds out the rotation is simply a placeholder/innings-eater (mmmm, innings) while our high-upside prospects get more seasoning, but are we more pleased with Tomko and Maroth pitching adequately and keeping us in a few ballgames in 2008 versus letting some of our younger, high-upside guys audition against big-league hitting and possibly getting them primed for a solid if not great 2009/2010?  It's an age-old question (at least for teams like KC with a seemingly perpetual dearth of quality pitching) about the pros and cons of developing more in AAA, as a big league SP, out of the bullpen, etc.  There's probably no clear answer to that question, and that each prospect would likely benefit from a different scenario (AAA vs. SP vs. BP) depending on their individual skill level, experience, mentality, etc.  

I'd be curious to hear what others think about this subject.  I suspect we'd all have the knee-jerk reaction of being very pleased if Tomko does well for us this year, but does it really help us in the long run if he gets us a few extra wins this year at the expense of the development of a high-upside, near-ready prospect?  Perhaps it does if his performance keeps our bullpen fresher and out of the game a little longer, as opposed to having a JDLR-type getting knocked out of games in the 3rd inning periodically and overextending the arms in our pen.  Personally, if it came down to two scenarios, where someone like Tomko or Maroth yielded similar season-long stats to someone like JDLR or Davies but was a lot more reliable, less volatile with fewer ups and downs, I'd take the young guy every time, but whether or not those young guys can produce even in that capacity is still a big if.  

Either way, the fact that we're going into the season confident about 3 starters and hopeful about a number of prospects as well as some decent retreads is a world of difference from the past few years.  I don't see us ever having to worry about an ongoing Elarton-esque performance again, or a Mark Redman-ish #1 SP.  That makes me very happy as a KC fan.  

by royalblues on Feb 29, 2008 11:44 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

You can stick a fork in Maroth.
He cracks the starting rotation, and he won't last six starts. The guy's stuff has fallen off, and it was never all that great to begin with. He's over the Josh Towers line at this point.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 29, 2008 12:27 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Nunez
barring injury, will definitely make this team.

by loyal2s dad on Feb 29, 2008 1:13 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

He might get traded
Moore has already shown a willingness to trade him once.  And with the numbers game problem, some pitcher(s) will have to be waived/traded/released.  I don't know that Nunez is the most likely, but he's on the short list.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 29, 2008 2:55 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

His Violent Delivery
Could lead Moore to believe he won't last. I love his fastball and his breaking pitches are good enough when he has command of them, but maybe Moore thinks we should showcase him enough to get good return before his arm explodes.
I'm not getting older....oh, wait, yes I am....and slower.... and weaker. God, this is great!

by philofthenorth on Feb 29, 2008 11:45 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Soria
Great post.  Soria definitely needs to be considered for a spot in the rotation.  A couple years ago in the Mexican Pacific League he was a starter and threw a perfect game.  His stats from that season:

71 1/3 innings, 9-0, 1.77 ERA, 11 starts, 19 BB, 46 H, 73 K

by kctulsa94 on Mar 1, 2008 8:52 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Kansas City Royals.
Start posting about the Royals »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

K_small
Moore-isms Translated
Royals_85_small
Dating More = Dayton Moore

Recent FanPosts

Images_small
BBQ, Beer, and Baseball
Small
OT: The Who = embarrassing
Royalsreview_small
I Will Be On a Podcast Tonight
Bsnublcd_small
The Case for Michael McKenry
_41153080_gallerysanta_small
OT: Royals Review Fantasy Football Keeper League
Small
Justification
Royalsreview_small
Super Bowl Open Thread
39135485-59af19dbb26654095f910f34176af094_4ae8a81e-scaled_small
Predictions Group
Royalsreview_small
My Wife Would Like to Clarify

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Royalsreview_small royalsreview